You Drink, Uber Drives – For Free
startuppanel.co
startuppanel.co
If cab fare home is more expensive than the cost of the drinks needed to get you over the limit, then it makes (financial) sense to drink up.
Which sounds harmless, since Uber's agreeing to drive you home.
But if your blood alcohol level is high enough to impair your ability to drive safely, who's to say what other abilities it might impair?
And does Uber really want to assume moral liability, if not legal liability, if something goes wrong?
[0]0.08 in most states, I believe.
The amount of alcohol needed to be over the legal limit is actually remarkably small and Toronto and other major cities they might possibly do this promotion in aren't exactly known for cheap drinks. Based on that and the high probability that a person who goes out drinking in a major city will not venture too far from their residence, I expect that two drinks would usually be more expensive than a ride home.
Uber fucks up plenty of things that are worth taking issue with, it is my opinion that this is not one of those things. I think most people should see this as a morally positive promotion.
You can easily 'lie' to the breathalyzer to make yourself read as over the limit without drinking more also, so for me it is the same issue.
It's extremely common where I live for various entities (colleges, cities, bars, etc.) to offer safe ride home programs free of charge. Some places just do it during holidays or other alcohol-related events, but some do it year-round. It seems like it's been pretty much exclusively a good thing. I think the risks associated with driving under the influence far, far outweigh the other dangers typically associated with drinking.
The problem with saying I should just know is that by the definition of impairment, my judgement would be impaired.
The legal blood alcohol limit in basically any developed country is usually so low that people can readily hit it with a drink or two without feeling any sort of intoxication from it, let alone having their abilities grossly impaired.
I don't think this publicity stunt carries much danger for anyone involved beyond the usual dangers associated with operating a taxi at night. Drinkers will still get cabs, free or paid for, but this may cause more people "on the fence" to get a cab rather than driving their car home.
Even getting them into a line for a free cab may spur them to just take a paid one since they've made already made a moral choice to not drive after drinking by lining up for the cab in the first place.
It's a good idea overall, I think, so long as the cab drivers are properly compensated for it. I would also wonder about how it will affect the drivers in terms of lining up to collect these customers versus simply taking whatever is going through the app. There's an opportunity cost involved for them if they're sitting in a queue versus driving around waiting to be hailed with or without the app.
a lot of places have basically zero tolerance to drinking and driving. here in brazil, anything higher than 0.05mg/l is subjected to fine and inability to drive for 12mo. [0]
so, even if you had one beer, you need to take a cab back home.
[0] http://www.loc.gov/lawweb/servlet/lloc_news?disp3_l205403471...
But I agree with your concern, I'm sure there will be one or two instances when some incredibly stupid individual will do that and ruin it for everyone.
So what, as long as it keeps people who would otherwise drive drunk off the road?
>"But if your blood alcohol level is high enough to impair your ability to drive safely, who's to say what other abilities it might impair?"
Give me a break. I don't care if you are so drunk you can hardly walk, and fall and smash your face. That's your problem. Better than killing my friends and family behind the wheel. That's my problem.
If you want to talk about "perverse" incentives you've no sense of the big picture. Are you really going to criticize Uber when there is a multibillion dollar alcohol and nightlife industry advertising, giving away free samples, and over serving people? Get some perspective, you're way overthinking this.
You have zero evidence that this will increase drinking and it's pretty reasonable to hypothesize that it will decrease drunk driving. Ethical responsibility for drinking falls solely on the drinker anyway.
Of course its for publicity. Its a for profit business. If you can give something to the consumers and get something out of it at the same time, its daft not to do so.
> But if your blood alcohol level is high enough to impair your ability to drive safely, who's to say what other abilities it might impair?
I don't understand the concern here at all. Clearly you've maintained enough sense to call Uber instead of drive home, so what are you concerned about here?
Honestly, I think people need to step back from this negative image trying to be branded onto Uber to evaluate their projects a little more objectively. Calling it perverse, is rather extreme.
It hasn't had ANY undesirable results. Calling it perverse at this point in time is definitely a pessimistic take on Uber's play here.
Dude, in most countries (including most US states) your blood alcohol is legally above the limit after two beers. Do you really think most people are royally fucked with their "other abilities" after just two beers?
Doesn't HN have a new rule about pointless negativity? If this doesn't violate that rule, I don't know what does.
Video: https://youtu.be/VECIOprmHMg
We’ve all been there.
You go out with friends and by then end of the night find yourself drunk in the back of a taxi, searching for $10 to pay the driver. For those who stumble home, singing Sweet Caroline, we applaud you.
This is where Uber took initiative.
The popular ride sharing app is often at the center of global debate as it attempts to disrupt traditional taxis while battling employee wage suits and suppressing customer safety concerns.
However, recently the service has introduced free rides for anyone who passes a breathalyzer test. The concept is called Uber Safe, their attempt to suppress drunk driving. it consists of a massive breathalyzer machine on on a sidewalk. All you have to do is take a straw, from the machine, and see if you blow over the legal limit.
If you do pass, you’re too drunk to drive. Uber will hail you a car for a free ride home.
A site has appeared in Toronto as a marketing stunt, so don’t get excited. However, with the massive turnout Uber has told users to “stay tuned” for more kiosks in more areas.
Our only concern will be the lines at any NYC kiosk when at that point, drunks will have to decide between waiting for a possible free ride or taking their chances.
I would go from spending $100/mo to $0
Did you ever think that overthinking things might give people a perverse incentive to drink so they can forget your post?
Uber may not be a model corporate citizen, but I have trouble as seeing this as anything but a good move. Particularly, given that my current city has a pretty big issue with drunk drivers.
A. Leave my car downtown and have to get it in the morning
B. Give drunk Josh the option to drive. I'd rather take a Lyft, not drink and take a Lyft back then take the chance that I will made a very stupid decision while drunk and drive home.
I'm rarely "shitfaced" but most of my friends use Uber/Lyft that same way I do so I'm always drunk or planning or being drunk when I take a Lyft. For everything else I just drive myself.
What I'm trying to say is Uber/Lyft drivers already deal with this so if this initiative helps to keep drunks off the road (both driving and walking, which I've heard can be even more dangerous than driving) then I'm all for it.
You have to wonder how these kind of things even get past the initial brainstorming sessions. It only takes a couple reasonably intelligent people a bit of discussion to come up with why this is not a good idea.
But maybe Uber knows what they are doing, or how to handle the downsides. I'm skeptical.
People respond to incentives. If you add an incentive to drink more, they will do so. Whether the positives outweigh the negatives is hard to tell, but you can't ignore the fact that they are there.
Copy/pasting what I said elsewhere:
So instead of drinking one or two drinks someone might drink two or three? Be still my heart! /sarcasm
If you want to talk about "perverse" incentives you've no sense of the big picture. Are you really going to criticize Uber when there is a multibillion dollar alcohol and nightlife industry advertising, giving away free samples, and over serving people? Get some perspective, you're way overthinking this.
You have zero evidence that this will increase drinking and it's pretty reasonable to hypothesize that it will decrease drunk driving. Ethical responsibility for drinking falls solely on the drinker anyway.
If you'd like me to criticize the alcohol and nightlife industry I could do that as well, but I was discussing Uber, as that is what the link discussed.
You've just described the multibillion dollar industry "giving away free samples, and over serving people" and then claimed that the responsibility falls solely on the drinker. You're all over the place copsarebastards.
I talked about the alcohol and nightlife industries as a criticism of your statements. Alcohol consumption being the responsibility of the drinker is a statement of my own belief. If you can't understand why these ideas are not contradictory I can't help you.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Breathalyzer#Mouth_alcohol
"[C]ertified breath-test operators are trained to observe a test subject carefully for at least 15–20 minutes before administering the test [... A] very tiny amount of alcohol from the mouth, throat or stomach can have a significant impact on the breath-alcohol reading." If so, people who haven't been drinking at all but are willing to carry around a flask of liquor might be able to get free rides home at any time.
Also how can you call yourself a adult and then go out get completely shitfaced then go "Oh no, I don't have a way to get home." like it was a unavoidable consequence of existence.
*People who downvote (but have no correction, objection, or answer to) this may have to reevaluate the role bacteria feces plays in their lives.